SUPREME COURT NIXES RANDOM USE OF “DRUG DOGS” IN SCHOOLS

In May 2008, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that the police may not randomly use dogs to sniff for illegal drugs in the schools of this country.

In a Sarnia high school about 2 years ago, the police were invited to bring their dogs on the premises so that they might look for illicit drugs. The students remained “locked down” in their classrooms while the dogs roamed the corridors and the gymnasiums which contained the students’ school bags and possessions.

“Entering a schoolyard does not amount to crossing the border of a foreign state”, thundered Mr. Justice Louis Lebel of the Supreme Court. The Court held that the use of dogs this way amounted to a “search” within the meaning of the Charter. In this case, the search was deemed “unreasonable” because the police had neither obtained a warrant nor did they have reasonable grounds to believe that any particular student was harbouring unlawful drugs. Only one student was found to be in possession of such drugs, but the drugs could not be used as evidence when he was subsequently charged and prosecuted.

CCLA was represented in the case, both at the Ontario Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court of Canada, by Jonathan Lisus of McCarthy Tetrault. Lisus had argued that students’ backpacks are “akin to a study, bedroom, and office rolled into one”. As such, they attracted privacy rights. [R. v. A.M.]